Intertainer Patented Digital Content Download
Intertainer owns US patent number 6.925.469 for downloading digital content from the Internet. Specifically, the patent describes an online system for managing and delivering digital materials received from different suppliers. This description includes the iTunes Store , Google Video , and other services, even AllofMP3.com . The application was filed in 2001, and the patent was filed in 2005.
Thousands of Internet companies that distribute commercial audio and video recordings via the Internet may face the need to pay royalties. If they refuse, they will be tried. The first “refusers” whose cases were brought to court were Google , Apple and Napster . Reports about it NY Times .
Intertainer was founded in 1996 by professional producer Jonathan T. Taplin, who sincerely believed that the Internet would someday become a channel for the distribution of film and television programs. The start-up attracted serious investors, including Microsoft and Intel, and fully entered the era of the dotcom boom. Until 2002, the overall impression remained that Intertainer’s business was growing successfully. The subscriber base on the Internet exceeded 125 thousand subscribers, and another 35 thousand people paid for receiving content through the cable network. But in 2002, the company closed the service and accused Movielink , a company founded by major Hollywood studios, including Sony, Universal and Warner Brothers, to undermine its business.
The antitrust investigation against Movielink ended without result in 2004. During this time, Intertainer's lawyers did not sit idle: they patented the technology of commercial distribution of audio and video files via the Internet. To date, Intertainer owns nine patents, including the aforementioned patent No. 6,925,469. There is an excellent reason to sue Google, Apple and Napster. Then all the others will come, except maybe Microsoft, because this is one of the Intertainer investors.
')
The trial will take place in the Marshall District Court (Texas). Going to the courts in those places traditionally decide cases in favor of patent owners, but in this case, according to experts, difficulties may arise. The reason is that the patent application was filed relatively recently, in March 2001. At that time, many companies, including Real Networks, were already successfully conducting commercial video broadcasts via the Internet with a paid subscription.
The modern patent system, one after another, gives rise to such “lawyers-businessmen” with bundles of patents on their hands, like Intertainer. They are suing everyone in a row - that’s their business.
“There are so many similar processes today,” said Eric Goldman, director of the High Tech Law Institute at Santa Clara Law University. - It is difficult to determine which of them represent a serious threat, and which - not. I have the same problem with this patent as with other patents of the dotcom boom times. I don't understand what it means. ”
Thousands of Internet companies that distribute commercial audio and video recordings via the Internet may face the need to pay royalties. If they refuse, they will be tried. The first “refusers” whose cases were brought to court were Google , Apple and Napster . Reports about it NY Times .
Intertainer was founded in 1996 by professional producer Jonathan T. Taplin, who sincerely believed that the Internet would someday become a channel for the distribution of film and television programs. The start-up attracted serious investors, including Microsoft and Intel, and fully entered the era of the dotcom boom. Until 2002, the overall impression remained that Intertainer’s business was growing successfully. The subscriber base on the Internet exceeded 125 thousand subscribers, and another 35 thousand people paid for receiving content through the cable network. But in 2002, the company closed the service and accused Movielink , a company founded by major Hollywood studios, including Sony, Universal and Warner Brothers, to undermine its business.
The antitrust investigation against Movielink ended without result in 2004. During this time, Intertainer's lawyers did not sit idle: they patented the technology of commercial distribution of audio and video files via the Internet. To date, Intertainer owns nine patents, including the aforementioned patent No. 6,925,469. There is an excellent reason to sue Google, Apple and Napster. Then all the others will come, except maybe Microsoft, because this is one of the Intertainer investors.
')
The trial will take place in the Marshall District Court (Texas). Going to the courts in those places traditionally decide cases in favor of patent owners, but in this case, according to experts, difficulties may arise. The reason is that the patent application was filed relatively recently, in March 2001. At that time, many companies, including Real Networks, were already successfully conducting commercial video broadcasts via the Internet with a paid subscription.
The modern patent system, one after another, gives rise to such “lawyers-businessmen” with bundles of patents on their hands, like Intertainer. They are suing everyone in a row - that’s their business.
“There are so many similar processes today,” said Eric Goldman, director of the High Tech Law Institute at Santa Clara Law University. - It is difficult to determine which of them represent a serious threat, and which - not. I have the same problem with this patent as with other patents of the dotcom boom times. I don't understand what it means. ”
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/4912/
All Articles